Journal of Environmental Biology
pISSN: 0254-8704 ; eISSN: 2394-0379 ; CODEN: JEBIDP
Google Search the Journal web-site:
Abstract - Issue Nov 2010, 31 (6) Back
Prevalence of plasmid mediated pesticide resistant
bacterial assemblages in crop fields
Faculty of P.G and
Research Department of Zoology,
Abstract: Three crop fields namely, paddy, sugarcane and tomato exposed to bavistin [Methyl (1H-benzimidazol-2-yl) carbomate], monocrotophos [Dimethyl (E)-1-methyl-2-(methyl-carbamoyl) vinyl phosphate] and kinado plus [(EZ)-2-chloro-3-dimethoxyphosphinoyloxy-X1, X1-diethylbut-2-enamide], respectively were chosen for the present investigation to know the bacterial population and degradation of pesticides. The chemical nature of the soil and water samples from the pesticide contaminated fields was analysed along with counting of the total heterotrophic bacteria (THB), Staphylococci and Enterococcci population. Mean calcium, phosphate and biological oxygen demand were maximum in tomato field water. Field water recorded maximum phophate and silicate content, whereas, sugarcane field water elicited maximum dissolved oxygen content. On the other hand, available phosphate and exchangeable potassium were maximum is sugarcane field soil. Significant variations in the bacterial population were evident between the treatments in sugarcane field soil and tomato field water exposed to monocrotophos and kinado plus, respectively. In addition, significant variations between THB, Staphlyococci and Enterococci population were also evinced in both the sugarcane and tomato fields. The dominant pesticide resistant bacteria, Staphylococcus aureus, Enterococcus faecalis and Pseudomonas aeuroginosa harboured plasmids and the resistant trait observed were found to be plasmid borne.
Key words: Crop fields, Pesticide resistant bacteria, Kinadoplus, Bavistin, Moncrotophos, Plasmid
Copyright ? 2010 Triveni Enterprises. All rights reserved. No part of the Journal can be reproduced in any form without prior permission. Responsibility regarding the authenticity of the data, and the acceptability of the conclusions enforced or derived, rest completely with the author(s).